The authors have provided detailled responses to the reviewers and provided a new version of the article, which seems to me relevant and suitable for publication in NHESS. I have one minor comment and several smaller points.
Minor comment: the HIGH-END scenario, as defined by the authors page 10, is actually the upper bound of the likely range of IPCC projections. However, high-end scenarios usually refer to sea-level scenarios beyond the likely range (see for example, Hinkel et al 2015 NCC; Nicholls et al 2014 WCC among others). Other documents on this issue could be found in the WCRP Sea level grand challenge documents. I recommend to reconsider this wording all along the manuscript (results, discussion, conclusion, figure 3 in particular).
Other comments:
Page 3: may be a word to explain how the terminology on disaster risk reduction and climate change could be useful here (e.g., reference to the ISDR terminology, which uses mitigation as a component of the disaster reduction cycle, whereas the word has a completely different meaning in the littérature on climate change
Typpo and minor comments
page 2 line 10: "will be high" => "highly" ?
page 2 line 15: is "spread" grammatically correct here ?
I hope these comments are useful.
Gonéri Le Cozannet, BRGM |